Jump to content

CPU Choice for DCS Build


Recommended Posts

I'm planning a new machine for playing DCS using the Oculus Rift (Other gaming as well, but primarily DCS). My current system is a 3770K overclocked to 4.4 with a 1080TI and I still have to turn down so much detail in DCS with the rift that I've stopped playing until I can build a new machine. Its playable and I can get "acceptable" frame rates but I'm just tired of turning things down and want to see some more eye candy. The 3770K & 1080TI seem to still run pretty strong for most games but DCS in Oculus VR is very demanding. I really need FPS. I need all the performance I can get.

 

I wanted to go with a 9900K. Would the 9900K be a good choice for my uses? Or would the additional cores cause me too much heat and limit the speed of the chip too much? I'd be using 360 or 280 AIO but I've read that the 9900K puts out a lot of heat when overclocking and I'm guessing I'd likely have to overclock to get all the performance I can (I don't want to hurt the longevity of the chip too much though as I tend to keep a build for 4-5 years).

 

Or maybe there is a way better solution that will be out in the next month or so?

 

Some have suggested the 9700K instead of the 9900K suggesting that it might overclock better due to less heat but I'm not sure if thats true or not. Its been since 2012 that I built a machine last.

 

Price is not an object so I wouldn't be basing my CPU choice on saving a few bucks here or there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

id go 9700k ... hell im still rocking a 2600k and flying just fine. get a good mobo snd cooling and youll never regret any of those k chips

ASUS Tuf Gaming Pro x570 / AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 3.8 / XFX Radeon 6900 XT / 64 GB DDR4 3200 

"This was not in the Manual I did not read", cried the Noob" - BMBM, WWIIOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um I just upgraded to a 2080Ti from a 1080Ti and my CPU can still easily push the GPU to the wall having said that the gains are really mostly eye candy and some GPU head room for when things get busy in DCS. Nice but $.

 

Not sure what to make of the 9 series 9600K is one of the CPU's I have been looking at it's relatively cheap 6 cores/threads and given the that DCS doesn't seem to use more than 2 cores, sure Rift and other software are using other cores that should be fine looks like they clock out to 4.8~4.9 depending on the silicon lottery. But not ground breaking improvements over what I already have.

 

If I were to, I'd go with the 9900K only because even if not overclocked it has more cores but a 95W TD limit and more cores might be a windfall for Valkan API so might the new AMD CPU's with high core count and faster than current gen AMD clocks. Is there competition coming?

 

Also ED are planning on improved VR support (soon?) so maybe just stick with it until that happens and see what you need do then.

 

If you run Task Manager and see what the CPU and GPU are doing I'd be surprised if your CPU couldn't push the GPU to 100%, mind you I'd recommend you try and keep that somewhat below 100% utilization by careful tweaking of settings so you can maintain a 45FPS frame rate.

 

Just for comparison With 1080Ti link to settings screen shot with PD at 1.1.

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can wait a little bit, Ryzen 3000 leaks sound very promising towards the 5G...and much more cores than Intel, for equal money.

 

I'd go AMD if you can wait

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The choice of CPU will be insignificant as far as eye candy goes.

That is almost exclusively up to the GPU

Things like AA/AF HDR etc.. etc.. add no appreciable load to the CPU, the real true and honest answer is it doesn't really matter!

 

The 3770K is fine, albeit beginning to age.

If you do anything that take significant advantage of multiple threads (ie, not DCS) then consider Ryzen for value.

If you want the best of single threaded performance (ie, DCS) with a few more cores for the handful of tasks that can use them i'd suggest sticking with Intel.

I don't favour either brand.

 

A mate recently did an i3 8350K / GTX1070 build with brilliant results, was the best combo to fit the budget, and i think we was much better off with the 1070 then a 1060 or 1050 and a couple more CPU cores.

Previous to 8th gen i'd have never suggested an i3, but now they run 4 real cores at good clocks they are actually a solid gaming choice.

 

If you have more money to spare go the i5 K series SKU.

 

Overclocked or not the K SKUs benefit from higher base and turbo clocks, handy for DCS.

 

As for the eye candy, it's almost entirely up to the GPU, spend as high as you can there.

That is the most practical answer i can give.

 

Only get the i9 if you can already afford an RTX-2080Ti.

 

If the hint of fast Ryzen chips is indeed true this could also be an option.

R7 3800X - 32Gig RAM -- All SSD -- GTX1070 -- TM Warthog, MFG Crosswinds & TiR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um I just upgraded to a 2080Ti from a 1080Ti and my CPU can still easily push the GPU to the wall having said that the gains are really mostly eye candy and some GPU head room for when things get busy in DCS. Nice but $.

 

Not sure what to make of the 9 series 9600K is one of the CPU's I have been looking at it's relatively cheap 6 cores/threads and given the that DCS doesn't seem to use more than 2 cores, sure Rift and other software are using other cores that should be fine looks like they clock out to 4.8~4.9 depending on the silicon lottery. But not ground breaking improvements over what I already have.

 

If I were to, I'd go with the 9900K only because even if not overclocked it has more cores but a 95W TD limit and more cores might be a windfall for Valkan API so might the new AMD CPU's with high core count and faster than current gen AMD clocks. Is there competition coming?

 

Also ED are planning on improved VR support (soon?) so maybe just stick with it until that happens and see what you need do then.

 

If you run Task Manager and see what the CPU and GPU are doing I'd be surprised if your CPU couldn't push the GPU to 100%, mind you I'd recommend you try and keep that somewhat below 100% utilization by careful tweaking of settings so you can maintain a 45FPS frame rate.

 

Just for comparison With 1080Ti link to settings screen shot with PD at 1.1.

 

 

FYI: FragBum,

 

TDP is rated at BASE CLOCK with a workload that only Intel knows what it is, so TDP is really not good to measure or guess anything imho.

 

 

mine is 2 cores less and exceeded 200w last week when validating the install, BAM !

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't overlook RAM. Someone did here did some benchmarks a while back that showed RAM clock speed was worth a few percent on FPS. A few percent doesn't usually matter on a monitor but it can be the difference between falling into ASW or not on VR. I got some fancy DDR4166 for my build for that reason, didn't increase the overall cost too much. I haven't done any benchmarking though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI: FragBum,

 

TDP is rated at BASE CLOCK with a workload that only Intel knows what it is, so TDP is really not good to measure or guess anything imho.

 

 

mine is 2 cores less and exceeded 200w last week when validating the install, BAM !

 

Yes agree and thats why if I were to do a new build now it would be the 9900K from what I understand it supports the highest clock for all 8 cores, it can turbo 2 cores to 5 Ghz but only drops to 4.7 Ghz for all 8 cores out of the box. Best OC point about 120 to 130W power level, I know you can push them harder. :D

 

But yes AMD Ryzen 3000 series looks interesting and if we can has Vulkan API included in DCS. :smilewink:

 

 

 

@v81

 

Actually I think almost anything with ~4.5 Ghz ish (maybe lower) CPU can push a 2080Ti to the wall aka 100% utilisation and associated frame rate drops other bad fungswae in DCS under VR this is why I would suggest the OP hold off until DCS provide the VR updates.

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't overlook RAM. Someone did here did some benchmarks a while back that showed RAM clock speed was worth a few percent on FPS. A few percent doesn't usually matter on a monitor but it can be the difference between falling into ASW or not on VR. I got some fancy DDR4166 for my build for that reason, didn't increase the overall cost too much. I haven't done any benchmarking though.

 

Whilst I did notice a slight improvement in DCS by using all 4 channels (8 RAM slots X99) it was slight, generally what keeps you out of ASW is more GPU or at least having some head room with GPU utilisation at about 80% average at least that is what I am finding with the 2080Ti.

 

However as in all builds every little bit adds to overall performance.

 

YMMV. :thumbup:

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies thus far :) Greatly appreciated.

 

To answer some questions...

 

My budget would be reasonably high for this build so budget wouldn't be a deciding factor on which CPU. I'd definitely be planning to install whatever the latest and greatest GPU is, at the time, most likely the 2080TI.

 

I would most likely be using 32 Gigs of memory. Possibly more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

My only concern re AMD is that their single-thread performance is much less than what their clock speeds suggest relative to Intel .

Yes , Vulcan , but we don't know when or how implemented .

 

Edit

 

Aaand i just found this: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3751938&postcount=63


Edited by Svsmokey

9700k @ stock , Aorus Pro Z390 wifi , 32gb 3200 mhz CL16 , 1tb EVO 970 , MSI RX 6800XT Gaming X TRIO , Seasonic Prime 850w Gold , Coolermaster H500m , Noctua NH-D15S , CH Pro throttle and T50CM2/WarBrD base on Foxxmounts , CH pedals , Reverb G2v2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where are you guys getting these 2080Ti's?

 

https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=0&family=GeForce+20+Series+Family&chipset=RTX+2080+Ti

 

The EVGA site always seems to be sold out.

EVGA 2080TI FTW3 ULTRA - 99000k - 32gb 3200 14-14-14-34 - ASROK Phantom 9 - EVGA 1300W - 970 EVO Plus 1TB [X2] - Noctua D15 - Noctua NF-A14 iPPC-3000 [X8] - Asus PG349q 34" 3440 x 1440 @120hz - Oculus S - EVGA D87 Case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where are you guys getting these 2080Ti's?

 

https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=0&family=GeForce+20+Series+Family&chipset=RTX+2080+Ti

 

The EVGA site always seems to be sold out.

 

I'm in Australia and bought from one of our local PC stores, I ordered mine 31st Dec same store sold out of 2080Ti's the next day this happens often and likely why the price is holding up.

 

As an aside our pricing here is near double US pricing somewhat higher than exchange rate plus tax. Hang in there they will become available. :thumbup:

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to go with a 9900K. Would the 9900K be a good choice for my uses? Or would the additional cores cause me too much heat and limit the speed of the chip too much? I'd be using 360 or 280 AIO but I've read that the 9900K puts out a lot of heat when overclocking and I'm guessing I'd likely have to overclock to get all the performance I can (I don't want to hurt the longevity of the chip too much though as I tend to keep a build for 4-5 years).

 

Or maybe there is a way better solution that will be out in the next month or so?

 

Some have suggested the 9700K instead of the 9900K suggesting that it might overclock better due to less heat but I'm not sure if thats true or not. Its been since 2012 that I built a machine last.

 

Price is not an object so I wouldn't be basing my CPU choice on saving a few bucks here or there.

I'm twice confused, why do they want the 9900K? For flashing? The 9900K is totally useless over the 9700K for gaming. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-9700k-9th-gen-cpu,5876-9.html Even the 9700K is overkill for DCS for now.

 

If you can't cool down a CPU with a 360 radiator, something is wrong.

Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 9900K for gaming :chair:I'm speechless.

aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS81L0EvODA4ODk0L29yaWdpbmFsL0ltYWdlMS5wbmc=

Cooling: Corsair H115i v2.

 

"According to Silicon Lottery's latest statistics, 28% of Core i7-9700Ks the company tested can reach 5.1 GHz or greater (though it only uses a -2 AVX offset and a higher 1.362V Vcore setting). As of 10/28/18, Silicon Lottery reports that all Core i7-9700Ks it tested can maintain 4.9 GHz or greater."

 

"Intel's Core i7-9700K certainly has enough horsepower to push the fastest graphics cards available."

 

"To be sure, Intel's Core i7-9700K is the new mainstream performance leader for enthusiasts with money to spare. If heavily-threaded productivity applications are commonplace on your desktop, there might be reason to invest in Core i9-9900K. Otherwise, avid gamers and overclockers will find Core i7-9700K to be a well-balanced chip that doesn’t disappoint."

Attache ta tuque avec d'la broche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lisa showed us how a good 7nm "chiplet" looks like, with up to 16 cores.

 

Imho, it will have 16 cores and 5G+, I bet a module !

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd do what others have already noted, which is to wait a few months to see how the new 7nm Ryzen 3 chips stack up to Intels stretched 9th gen 14nm chips. At the similar price point of that 9900k you will definitely be getting greater than 8 physical cores - probably 12 or 16 -, an AM4 platform that supports PCI 4.0 on at least the x16 slot, and quite possibly a chip with a comparable IPC to that of the 9900K. It will be on 7 nm instead of 14nm so it will run more cooler, most likely allowing for overclocking headroom. At the very least, the ryzen 3 chips will be much cheaper than the intel chips with more cores, and the money you save from not buying intel you can invest into a a better gpu. I don't think we'll see anything fantastic from intel until at least mid to late 2020 after they get their fabrication process sorted out and deal with their supply problems.

Ryzen9 5800X3D, Gigabyte Aorus X570 Elite, 32Gb Gskill Trident DDR4 3600 CL16, Samsung 990 Pr0 1Tb Nvme Gen4, Evo860 1Tb 2.5 SSD and Team 1Tb 2.5 SSD, MSI Suprim X RTX4090 , Corsair h115i Platinum AIO, NZXT H710i case, Seasonic Focus 850W psu, Gigabyte Aorus AD27QHD Gsync 1ms IPS 2k monitor 144Mhz, Track ir4, VKB Gunfighter Ultimate w/extension, Virpil T50 CM3 Throttle, Saitek terrible pedals, RiftS

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd do what others have already noted, which is to wait a few months to see how the new 7nm Ryzen 3 chips stack up to Intels stretched 9th gen 14nm chips. At the similar price point of that 9900k you will definitely be getting greater than 8 physical cores - probably 12 or 16 -, an AM4 platform that supports PCI 4.0 on at least the x16 slot, and quite possibly a chip with a comparable IPC to that of the 9900K. It will be on 7 nm instead of 14nm so it will run more cooler, most likely allowing for overclocking headroom. At the very least, the ryzen 3 chips will be much cheaper than the intel chips with more cores, and the money you save from not buying intel you can invest into a a better gpu. I don't think we'll see anything fantastic from intel until at least mid to late 2020 after they get their fabrication process sorted out and deal with their supply problems.

 

:thumbup:

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the benchmarking I was thinking of, scroll down a bit and there are charts for DRAM frequency and impact on FPS:

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2624490&postcount=2

 

 

All other things equal he found a 10% increase in average FPS and a 15% increase in minimum FPS going from DDR4-2133 to DDR4-3200.

 

Perhaps so, as I noted my system got an improvement with better memory throughput. :thumbup:

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For DCS go with the 9700K. Intel purposely removed hyper threading to allow for up to 200% boost multiplier. DCS isn't well coded for multi core and so the boost will be a huge bonus.

 

I think they removed HT so as not to compete with the 9900K it's a better CPU out of the box period, the 9700K might be better value as a gaming CPU. :D

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CPU Choice for DCS Build

 

All other things equal he found a 10% increase in average FPS and a 15% increase in minimum FPS going from DDR4-2133 to DDR4-3200.

 

that’s interesting. quite a bit more than youtube testers were getting in other games.

maybe dcs pulls more data from memory than those other games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...